The long history of experimental research on the prisoner's dilemma (PD) has primarily used a methodology that eliminates cues to participants. Researchers, however, have interpreted participants' choices as cooperative or competitive. The authors' research shows that giving participants researchers' interpretive labels of the game, the choices, and the outcomes, compared to no labels, led to significantly more cooperation; labels such as trust and cooperate/defect augmented cooperation even more. A second experiment found that independent evaluations of the labels led to perceptions that were similar to individuals' choices in the first experiment. These results suggest that we might need to rethink the import of many of our previous findings and their applicability to everyday interactions.
Aronson, E., T.D. Wilson, and M.B. Brewer.1998. Experimentation in social psychology . In The handbook of social psychology, vol. 2, ed. Daniel T.Gilbert, SusanT. Fiske, and Gardner Lindzey, 99-142. New York: Oxford University Press.
2.
Batson, C.D., and T. Moran.1999. Empathy-induced altruism in a prisoner's dilemma. European Journal of Social Psychology29:909-24.
3.
Bettenhausen, K., and J.K. Murnighan.1991. Developing and challenging a group norm: Interpersonal cooperation and structural competition. Administrative Science Quarterly36:20-35.
4.
Bottom, W., S. Daniels, K.S. Gibson, and J.K. Murnighan.2002. When talk is not cheap: Substantive penance and expressions of intent in rebuilding cooperation. Organization Science13:497-513.
5.
Eiser, J.R., and K.K. Bhavnani.1974. The effect of situational meaning on the behaviour of subjects in the prisoner's dilemma game. European Journal of Social Psychology4 (1): 93-97.
6.
Elliott, C.S., D.M. Hayward, and S. Canon.1998. Institutional framing: Some experimental evidence. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization35:455-64.
7.
Dawes, R.M.1980. Social dilemmas. Annual Review ofPsychology31:169-93.
8.
Dawes, R.M., J. McTavish, and H. Shaklee.1977. Behavior, communication, and assumptions about other people's behavior in a commons dilemma situation. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology35:1-11.
9.
Frank, R.H., T. Gilovich, and D.T. Regan.1993. Does studying economics inhibit cooperation?Journal of Economics Perspectives7:159-71.
10.
Gigerenzer, G.2000. Adaptive thinking: Rationality in the real world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11.
Harris, R.J.1969. A geometrical classification for 2X2 interval-symmetric games. Behavioral Science14:138-46.
12.
Johnston, M., C. Markey, and L.A. Messe.1973. A sex difference in labeling effects on behavior in the prisoners' dilemma game. In Proceedings of the Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association , 323-24. n.p.
13.
Kahneman, D., and A. Tversky.1979. Prospect theory-analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica47:263-91.
14.
Kelley, H.H., and J.W. Thibaut.1978. Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. New York: Wiley .
Larrick, R.P., and S. Blount.1997. The claiming effect: Why players are more generous in social dilemmas than in ultimatum games. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology72:810-25.
17.
Ledyard, J.O., and T.R. Palfrey.1995. Experimental game theory introduction . Games and Economic Behavior10:1-5.
18.
Liberman, V., S.M. Samuels, and L. Ross.2004. The name of the game: Predictive power of reputations versus situational labels in determining prisoner's dilemma game moves. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin30:1175-85.
19.
Luce, R.D., and H. Raiffa.1957. Games and decisions. New York: John Wiley.
20.
March, J.G.1994. A primer on decision-making: How decisions happen. New York: Free Press.
21.
Messick, D.M., and M.B. Brewer.1983. Solving social dilemma: A review. Review of Personality and Social Psychology4:11-44.
22.
Murnighan, J.K., T.R. King, and F. Schoumaker.1990. The dynamics of cooperation in asymmetric dilemmas. In Advances in group processes, vol. 7, ed. E. Lawler, B. Markovsky, C. Ridgeway , and H. Walker, 179-202. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
23.
Murnighan, J.K., and A.E. Roth.1983. Expecting continued play in prisoner's dilemma games: A test of several models. Journal of Conflict Resolution27:279-300.
24.
Nemeth, C.1972. A critical analysis of research utilizing the prisoner's dilemma paradigm for the study of bargaining. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology6:203-31.
25.
Newell, A., and H.A. Simon.1972. Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
26.
Orwant, C.J., and J.E. Orwant.1970. A comparison of interpreted and abstract versions of mixed-motive games. Journal of Conflict Resolution14:91-97.
27.
Oskamp, S., and D. Perlman.1965. Factors affecting cooperation in a prisoner's dilemma game. Journal of Conflict Resolution9:358-59.
28.
Ostrom, E., T. Dietz, N. Dolsak, P.C. Stern, S. Stonich, and E.U. Weber.2002. The drama of the commons. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
29.
Pillutla, M.M., and X.P. Chen.1999. Social norms and cooperation in social dilemmas: The effects of context and feedback. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes78:81-103.
30.
Rapoport, A.1988. Experiments with n-person social traps I: Prisoner's dilemma, weak prisoner's dilemma, volunteer's dilemma, and largest number. Journal of Conflict Resolution32:457-72.
31.
Rapoport, A., and A.M. Chammah.1966. Game of chicken. American Behavioral Scientist10:10.
32.
Rilling, J.K., D.A. Gutman, T.R. Zeh, G. Pagnoni, G.S. Berns, and C.D. Kilts.2002. A neural basis for social cooperation . Neuron35:395-405.
33.
Roth, A.E., and J.K. Murnighan.1978. Equilibrium behavior and repeated play in prisoners' dilemma games. Journal of MathematicalPsychology17:189-98.
34.
Schelling, T.1960. The strategy of conflict. London: Oxford University Press.
35.
Tenbrunsel, A.E., and D.M. Messick.1999. Sanctioning systems, decision frames, and cooperation. Administrative Science Quarterly44:684-707.
36.
Tor, A., and M.H. Bazerman.2004. Focusing failures in competitive environments: Explaining decision errors in the Monty Hall game, the acquiring a company problem, and multiparty ultimatums. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making16:353-74.
37.
Tucker, A.W.1950. A two-person dilemma. Mimeograph, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. (Reprint, On jargon: The prisoner's dilemma, UMAP Journal1 [1980]: 101.)
38.
Tversky, A., and D. Kahneman.1986. Rational choice and the framing of decisions . Journal of Business59 (4): 5251-78.
39.
van de Kragt, J. C. Alphonse, J.M. Orbell, and R.M. Dawes.1983. The minimal contributing set as a solution to public goods problems. American Political Science Review77:112-22.
40.
van Dijk, E., and H. Wilke.2000. Decision-induced focusing in social dilemmas: Give-some, keep-some, take-some, and leave-some dilemmas. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology78:92-104.
41.
van Lange, P., W. Liebrand, D. Messick, and H. Wilke.1992. Introduction and literature review. In Social dilemmas: Theoretical issues and research findings, ed. W. Liebrand, D. Messick, and H. Wilke, 3-28. New York : Pergamon.
42.
Wrightsman, L.S., Jr., J. O'Connor, and N.J. Baker.1972. Cooperation and competition: Readings on mixed-motive games. Belmont, CA: Cole Publishing.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
